In Response to Re: What do you think of The Occupy the Super Bowl initiative? : The Tea Party Movement does not show any of the traits of facism. Fascists seek rejuvenation of their nation based on commitment to an organic national community where its individuals are united together as one people in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry , culture , and blood through a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through discipline , indoctrination , physical education , and eugenics . (wiki) They want less social spending and have priorities based on social morality. That's about it. Likening them to Nazis is crazy. You're going overboard relying on the "spectrum" which is extremely imperfect. A Tea Partier today is a '60s Democrat,Posted by BabeParilli

Unless these protesters bought tickets to the game, it shouldn't be a problem.

I'm happy to see that opposing parties on this "Sports" Forum haven't acted the same way they do in Congress.

The funny thing for me is that although there will always be parts of me that will be a Massachusetts Lib, throughout the years I've adopted enough Conservative Views that there is no party that represents me right now. There are parts of the fringe ie; Tea Party, Green Party that appeal to me but unfortunately they both manage to go to extremes.

If this protest is about wages, then I suppose it's about the right to work for slave wages so we can compete with the Chinese and that su----cks.

Unfortunately both major parties are owned lock stock and barrel by Wall Street and want us to fight over the red meat issues that we always fight over.

This is a diversion. However, if our elected politicians are going to act like wh---ores then I will hold my nose and vote for whoever is putting out for me (even if it's just a little bit). This is the way it has always been but in recent times it is much more in our faces.

My thoughts of a party or person that is going to save us are all gone. I'm in survival mode.

This is why the New England Patriots and other great things in my life take precedent over sleazy politicians and whatever garbage they are spewing on any given day.

In Response to Re: What do you think of The Occupy the Super Bowl initiative? : Nah, that's insulting to Libratarians. Do you really think Sara Palin is a Libratarian? Libratarians are nowhere near that conservative. Not even close. Posted by RustyGriswold

My understanding is they want no government involvement in anything, which is the very definition of libertarianism.

In Response to Re: What do you think of The Occupy the Super Bowl initiative? : Nah, that's insulting to Libratarians. Do you really think Sara Palin is a Libratarian? Libratarians are nowhere near that conservative. Not even close. Posted by RustyGriswold

Libertarians may or may not be conservative. It is all about individual liberty which government is anathema to.

In Response to Re: What do you think of The Occupy the Super Bowl initiative? : Yep. That's correct. Hitler framed the Jews in such a way specifically because anti-semitism always existed, he could use it as a tool and the Versailles Treaty was so bad for Germany (actually unfailry so to the point, every treaty since signed by a loser of a war is now completely different in approach), he pointed to the folks who signed it, which were Germans who happened to be Jewish. This is all really a sidebar in terms of discussing where the Nazi principles fall on a political spectrum. It's was very clearly an exclusionary, tight, isolationist, conservative movement.Posted by RustyGriswold

the one indisputable truth that I hope we can all agree on is that ultimately, it was the fault of the French. Per usual.

In Response to Re: What do you think of The Occupy the Super Bowl initiative? : My understanding is they want no government involvement in anything, which is the very definition of libertarianism.Posted by Roadrunner9234

No. They have no problem with government involvement as long as it either benefits them directly or isn't at odds with what they already believe. The whole anti-government line is a bunch of bs. Case in point a true libertarian would not believe in government restriction on abortion or drugs as well as Medicare or Social Security. There are not many people who claim to be tea partiers that subscribe to said philosophy.

In Response to Re: What do you think of The Occupy the Super Bowl initiative? : No, no. .Youy're confusing the terms. A Facists is a dictator, generally speaking. Tea Party is EXTREME RIGHT POLITICALLY NAZISM was EXTREME RIGHT POLITICALLY Do you know why the Tea Party exists? Because Republicans, who happened to be brainwashed morons (Not all Republicans, so people can calm down), feel like another right wing party is neeeded, but for it to be further to the right. They apparently missed the part where the Republican Party went from Abe Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt and shifted WAY RIGHT , especially the last 15 years. Even Reagan would be umcomfortable with this Tea Party thing.Posted by RustyGriswold

No no. The Tea Party exists because Republicans are supposed to be a small federal government party, and they clearly aren't. Thus, the Tea Party.

And calling their views extreme right is a flawed vision based on your concept of where the center is these days.

In Response to Re: What do you think of The Occupy the Super Bowl initiative? : No. They have no problem with government involvement as long as it either benefits them directly or isn't at odds with what they already believe. The whole anti-government line is a bunch of bs. Case in point a true libertarian would not believe in government restriction on abortion or drugs as well as Medicare or Social Security. There are not many people who claim to be tea partiers that subscribe to said philosophy.Posted by pcmIV

In Response to Re: What do you think of The Occupy the Super Bowl initiative? : Again, you;re being fooled by rhetoric. Thay's what they SAY. Answer me this, why didn't the Tea Party come into play during the Reagan or Bush Administrakions, where the gov't grew exponentially. You';ve been had. All they're doing is going with rhetoric to move to the right. Just so you know, I am a registered Independent and would call myself fiscally conservative and socially liberal, probably more of a progressive liberatarian. You're confused with the concepts.Posted by RustyGriswold

There was no Tea Party during Reagan because his spending was a cold war attempt to destroy the USSR. Despite fiscal concerns the TP seems to have little protest against spending trillions on war and defense.

Their existence at this juncture is because of continued social spending while excessive military spending continues. They would be quite pleased to continue outrageous military expenditure if social programs were slashed.

If not for their war fetish Ron Paul would be mopping up the R nomination as we speak.

In Response to Re: What do you think of The Occupy the Super Bowl initiative? : I don't think either movement can be compared to the third Reich. The tea party people are more like libertarians.Posted by Roadrunner9234

The Tea Party seems to consist mostly of old people who haven't yet realized that the massive government expenditures they're so upset about are in fact their own Social Security checks and Medicare payments.

In Response to Re: What do you think of The Occupy the Super Bowl initiative? : The Tea Party seems to consist mostly of old people who haven't yet realized that the massive government expenditures they're so upset about are in fact their own Social Security checks and Medicare payments. Posted by prolate0spheroid

Social Security would have been fine, if they didn't keep stealing the money from it for other things.

All other issues like moral issues,, religious issues, tax breaks , food stamps...are diversions used to concentrate power in these two parties and in turn in the hands of the people behind the parties.

The tea party and occupy movements are more similar than they think...alas both are tainted by their roots on the right and left and cannot cut through the BS.

In Response to Re: What do you think of The Occupy the Super Bowl initiative? : You mean the nazi's didn't use the fear of the people against the perceived richer class (namely bankers and investors who were mostly Jewish at the time) in order to gain power during poor economic times? Or that the occupy protesters didn't use the fear of citizens against the richer class during poor economic times while holding signs that promoted that the government needs to be changed to protect the workers? Rusty on this one you are kind of wrong. During the rise of the nazi party a conservative party had control of the German government in which the people thought was being to easy on the upper class and looking down on the lower class. The Nazi party was perceived to be a progressive party do to the promise of equalizing the classes and "giving every worker a car" promises and it expressed radical changes within the government which it promised to reign in coperations and make them work for the people. Not the neo-nazi's of today but the actual original nazi party pre-WW2 would today be considered a far left partyPosted by PatsEng

So many inaccuracies in your post that I would not know where best to begin.

Bismark's government was perceived as weak. They were not perceived as ultra-conservative. They were permissive.

The Nazis were perceived as strong, ultra-nationalistic, intolerant of any weakness, and ultra-conservative, with the average German thinking those were traits needed to restore order amongst chaos, pride amongst shame, leadership amongst leaderlessness.

Germany was at it's most liberal in its history following the war and during the Weimar Republic. A very vocal conservative minority blamed this social looseness, to some degree, for the fall of Germany and the loss of the war. They blamed Jews, gays, Gypsies, "theater types", Communists, and liberals for the loose morals.

There was a huge backlash against Weimar Republic (Bismark) for the Treaty of V., in which Germany was sold out by three Jewish bankers negotiating the treaty on Germany's behalf, thus creating an added backlash against Jews. Jews were also scape-goated for the war as profiteers {partially true, as (often Jewish) bankers pushed for war to finance war debt...BUT the industrialists also wanted war, as did the military - two factions mostly comprised of Christian or secular people, which the Nazis never blamed}. (Sorry to the Jewish members on this board, I am not anti-Semitic, but there is an ugly and inconvenient truth this stuff.)

The Nazis were marketing themselves as a solution to the people that hated the treaty, hated the disorder (Germans are feverishly addicted to order, even today), resented the Jewish bankers that got rich off of the war while people were starving in breadlines, and wanted Germany to rebuild as a world power (it had a history of having the best trained armies and the best artillery, and was on it's way to becoming the no. 1 naval power - part of the reason the British baited the Germans into WWI) -the German people got a taste of the power and wanted it back.

The main fault to your post is that you claim the Nazis were pro-worker. NO. They were pro-Big Business, but were selling it to the average simpleton factory worker as - wait for it - "If you support Big Business, Big Business will again thrive, and when Big Business thrives, you will be graced with (the crumbs of) the spoils enjoyed by Big Business." Sound familiar?

To re-cap,

1) The Nazi's capitalized on the German people's resentment of minority groups, that the Nazis vilified. (Substitute with illegal alien, gays and darker-skinned humans.)

6) The Nazis were decidedly pro-Big Business. They violently crushed workers' rallies and union organizers. Their leaders took graft from the next generation of Big Business profiteers (sound familiar, again?).

You would be served well to enroll in some college history courses. Even those in communities colleges do a fine job. Stop listening to talk radio nutjobs that take money under the desk from interested elites like the Koch family, Richard Mellon Scaiffe, Rev. Moon, etc. Those guys wil steer ypu wrong and light their stogies with your dreams for a better life.